1.Moral rights cover the right to publicly publish a work, the right to express the author’s name, and the right to keep the uniformity of the work. Regarding the right to keep the uniformity of the work, it originates from Article 6bis, Paragraph 1 of the Berne Convention of 1971 which provides that “the author shall have the right … to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation.” The Copyright Act has been amended for several times in the past, and the amendments regarding the right to keep the uniformity of the work are as follows:

(1) Article 25 of the Copyright Act as amended on July 10, 1985 provides, “a person who succeeds or inherits copyrights shall not mutilate the work, modify the work, change or hide the author’s name, or change the title of the work for publication, except that if the original author has agreed or the author’s will is followed, then such person is not limited by this article.”

(2) In July 6, 1992, the article was amended as Article 17 that provides, “An author has the right to remain the uniformity of the content, formality, and title of his work. If one of the following conditions is met, this article is not applicable: 1. The use of a work for educational purposes vested in Article 47 is a quotation, wording, terminology change, or other change not involved in the substantial content of the work. 2. The change of a work is necessary to make a computer program work in a particular computer or to correct an error that results from the design of a computer program that obviously cannot achieve the purposes of the original work. 3. The addition, reconstruction, repairment, or modification of an architectural work is performed. 4. The change of a work made according to the nature and using purposes and methods of such work is necessary and non-essential to the content.” The reasons of the amendment include: “ … (2) The right to keep the uniformity of the work is one of the important contents of moral rights. The current law has Article 25 addressing that, but Article 25 does not clearly express that the nature of the right is part of moral rights. Besides, the types of act that infringes moral rights are various and not easy to count. The types are not limited to what is vested in the current law, such as mutilating the work, modifying the work, changing or hiding the author’s name, or changing the title of the work for publication. So, Article 25 is amended now. (3) This article provides that an author has the right to keep the integrity of the content, formality, and title of her work. Without the author’s consent or based on the author’s will, a user cannot arbitrarily add something to, subtract something from, or modify the work. However, to consider the actual needs for the use and to meet the social fairness, regarding changes under certain situations, the right to keep the uniformity of the work cannot be granted. Thus, the article has exception clauses, where some exceptional cases are excluded … Because the types of use are so many that the list of the types cannot cover everything, the article provides general clauses as above. …”” The 1992 Copyright Act focuses on the uniformity of the content of a work and does not ask whether an author’s reputation is actually impacted. That is, even though a user’s act keeps the author’s original intent so as not to harm the author’s name and legitimacy or so as to enhance the original work, that act is infringement of moral rights except for the conditions set forth in the exception clause.

(3) Article 17 as amended and issued on January 21, 1998 provides, “An author shall have the right to stop others from distorting, mutilating, modifying, or changing by other means the content, formality, or title of her work so that her reputation is harmed.” The exception clause of Article 17 of the 1992 Copyright Act was removed. The amendment reasons include, “ … 2. The old law of 1992 provides a very strict rule about the right to keep the uniformity of the work. Even in a case where the work is changed to let the content of the work become better, except for the situations set forth in the exception clause of the same article, such act still constitutes the infringement of the right to keep the uniformity of the work. However, according to Article 6bis, Paragraph 1 of the Berne Convention, the right to keep the uniformity of the work which an author enjoys is to stop others from using her work by damaging her reputation. Besides, as technology gets more and more advanced, the types of use of a work are increased. The result of a use which changes the content of a work is not easily avoidable. According to the old law of 1992, that use will constitute infringement of the right to keep the uniformity of the work. Now, the amendment is made as above to not over-protect the right to keep the uniformity of the work. So, the distribution of a work is not retarded.”

(4) Thus, the rule vested in Article 17 of the Copyright Act as amended in 1998 sets a condition that the change of the content, formality, or title of a work results in harming the reputation of the author, which meets what is regulated by Article 6bis, Paragraph 1 of the Berne Convention so as to properly protect moral rights as well as to encourage others to use the work. Besides, the title of a work (such as name, title, headline, and so on) is deemed not to be protected by the Copyright Act. But, when it is combined with the work, it becomes an expression of the uniformity of the work. If there is an improper change (by distorting, mutilating, modifying, or other means) to an extent where the author’s reputation is harmed, then the infringement of the right to keep the uniformity of the work is established. For that, the prosecutor bears the burden of proof and has to point out the method of proof. (See Article 161, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act.)

Moral rights, the right to keep the uniformity of the work